|
Post by the light works on Mar 15, 2020 14:44:39 GMT
national sick leave: with the news that most bottom tier American can't AFFORD to take time off work when they are sick. (which isn't news to much of anybody who rubs shoulders with the working class) and all the reasons given by employers why they couldn't possibly provide paid sick leave programs (some being more relevant than others) perhaps we should adopt a national sick leave program: all employers pay into a federal sick leave program, based on their total payroll (employees with employer paid sick leave may be exempted, though employers might find it more economical to discontinue paid sick leave) when an employee takes sick leave, the employer submits a pay stub showing the lost hours due to sick leave, and the program pays the employee for their lost time. in an extended illness, the pay may be prearranged, which may be beneficial for paying medical care. the question will, of course, come up of abuse, which one option would be to simply write into the program that each employee gets40 hours per year allowance with no questions asked - which may be used for personal days or vacation days if the employee desires - and more than 40 hours in aggregate does require confirmation from a third party. and again - remember this is an idea to reduce the likelihood of having a burger stacker coughing on your buns. (also, the reason for it being a national program is to have the biggest risk pool and the smallest profit motive) Isn’t that sort of what the federal Workmen’s Compensation taxes are supposed to be covering already? very similar, except workers' compensation programs are a liability based system, where, unless an employer has an unusually high rate of illness that would trigger an occupational health investigation, the national sick leave model would be no-fault. (after all, if the employee gets sick outside of work, they are still as much of a contagion risk; and you don't want to penalize employers for their employees getting sick on their own time, or employers will try to fudge the numbers.) of course, the programs could operate under one umbrella, to reduce staffing expenses.
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Mar 16, 2020 21:46:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 17, 2020 1:13:02 GMT
a friend of mine has made the same offer (and on another thread I reported our school cafeterias are going to produce meals and the school bus company will deliver them on their regular routes) sounds now like other districts have the same plan, and if you want to buy stock in something, they plan to hand out laptops for home schooling. I don't have a guess on the brand, though.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 29, 2020 19:38:47 GMT
just an odd throwaway idea to entertain us with speculation:
a law that in a specified countrywide holiday, any employer who wants their employees to report to work, must also report to work and perform the duties of the lowest paid worker who is asked to work - in addition to paying overtime rates to all people who report to work.
of course, the obvious issues are that life safety can't take a day off, and people can't plan far enough in advance to survive a day when all businesses are closed.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Apr 29, 2020 20:07:23 GMT
just an odd throwaway idea to entertain us with speculation: a law that in a specified countrywide holiday, any employer who wants their employees to report to work, must also report to work and perform the duties of the lowest paid worker who is asked to work - in addition to paying overtime rates to all people who report to work. of course, the obvious issues are that life safety can't take a day off, and people can't plan far enough in advance to survive a day when all businesses are closed. I can see paying overtime rates, but what does making the employer do the lowest paid worker's job accomplish? The employer may not even be qualified to do that job.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 29, 2020 20:39:38 GMT
just an odd throwaway idea to entertain us with speculation: a law that in a specified countrywide holiday, any employer who wants their employees to report to work, must also report to work and perform the duties of the lowest paid worker who is asked to work - in addition to paying overtime rates to all people who report to work. of course, the obvious issues are that life safety can't take a day off, and people can't plan far enough in advance to survive a day when all businesses are closed. I can see paying overtime rates, but what does making the employer do the lowest paid worker's job accomplish? The employer may not even be qualified to do that job. sort of a misery loves company concept. it's intended to make the business owner think twice about trying to demand his employees work on a day that should be a day off for everyone. (I'm thinking Thanksgiving, Christmas, Labor day) the requirement for it to be the lowest paid position precludes him assigning himself duties that can be done from wherever he is going on vacation at.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 16:07:17 GMT
Trickle down vs. trickle up.
Trickle down is a tenet of Reganomics: the idea that if you give the wealthy more wealth, then it will trickle down to the rest of the economy. trickle up is a counter theory that the wealthy have become wealthy, because the natural flow of wealth is upwards, and thus the best way to encourage a healthy economy is to inject money into the BOTTOM of the cash flow circuit, where it will inevitable flow upwards towards the rich.
I think a big part of the US' current economic woes come from a certain class of wealthy people who operate on the philosophy that the economy works like a game of monopoly where one wins by gaining control of all the money on the board. I contend that they are wrong, because in monopoly, when that happens, a winner is declared, and then ALL the assets are removed from play, and then redistributed at the beginning of the next game. perhaps this is all rolling back around to my earlier idea that a person caught hoarding wealth should be required to spend more.
anyway, just a bit of morning musing about why our economy is so strained and we keep finding ourselves one hiccup away from a crash - and we have a bad case of hiccups.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 16:49:35 GMT
And speaking of moving assets, Elon Musk has had enough. He said he is pulling Tesla out of California. He claims it's because of the local politicians excessive and unconstitutional power grab during the COVID pandemic, but I think that was just the icing on the cake. He's been complaining about California's excessive regulations on manufacturing for a long time. California lawmakers response is f*** You. Texas responds, "you are more than welcome to move here." Sounds like he is going to move his "trickle down" jobs to Nevada and Texas. www.businessinsider.com/california-assemblywoman-tweets-f-elon-musk-in-tesla-factory-row-2020-5
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 16:52:42 GMT
And speaking of moving assets, Elon Musk has had enough. He said he is pulling Tesla out of California. He claims it's because of the local politicians excessive and unconstitutional power grab during the COVID pandemic, but I think that was just the icing on the cake. He's been complaining about California's excessive regulations on manufacturing for a long time. California lawmakers response is f*** You. Texas responds, "you are more than welcome to move here." Sounds like he is going to move his "trickle down" jobs to Nevada and Texas. www.businessinsider.com/california-assemblywoman-tweets-f-elon-musk-in-tesla-factory-row-2020-5yeah, Mrs TLW mentioned that particular spat. Musk wants to go back to business as usual, California thinks he can easily upgrade to distancing precautions. my thought was that he can pretty easily find a state that will let him make up his own rules.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:00:35 GMT
And speaking of moving assets, Elon Musk has had enough. He said he is pulling Tesla out of California. He claims it's because of the local politicians excessive and unconstitutional power grab during the COVID pandemic, but I think that was just the icing on the cake. He's been complaining about California's excessive regulations on manufacturing for a long time. California lawmakers response is f*** You. Texas responds, "you are more than welcome to move here." Sounds like he is going to move his "trickle down" jobs to Nevada and Texas. www.businessinsider.com/california-assemblywoman-tweets-f-elon-musk-in-tesla-factory-row-2020-5yeah, Mrs TLW mentioned that particular spat. Musk wants to go back to business as usual, California thinks he can easily upgrade to distancing precautions. my thought was that he can pretty easily find a state that will let him make up his own rules. Not business as usual. He said that he has plans for enacting safe working polices but the local health officials won't even listen to them. California is free to make their rules and they are free to enforce them in empty manufacturing plants.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:08:46 GMT
I think a big part of the US' current economic woes come from a certain class of wealthy people who operate on the philosophy that the economy works like a game of monopoly where one wins by gaining control of all the money on the board. I contend that they are wrong, because in monopoly, when that happens, a winner is declared, and then ALL the assets are removed from play, and then redistributed at the beginning of the next game. perhaps this is all rolling back around to my earlier idea that a person caught hoarding wealth should be required to spend more. So in Monopoly, you redistribute the wealth and the game starts over. And guess who wins? The same guy. In real society the same thing would happen. The people that know how to use it would build up the economy back up and the ones that didn't would throw it all away. And who comes out ahead? Everybody.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 17:09:54 GMT
yeah, Mrs TLW mentioned that particular spat. Musk wants to go back to business as usual, California thinks he can easily upgrade to distancing precautions. my thought was that he can pretty easily find a state that will let him make up his own rules. Not business as usual. He said that he has plans for enacting safe working polices but the local health officials won't even listen to them. California is free to make their rules and they are free to enforce them in empty manufacturing plants. not surprisingly, California disagrees with Musk's claims. www.cnn.com/2020/05/09/tech/elon-musk-tesla-threatens-california/index.html
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:14:49 GMT
Not business as usual. He said that he has plans for enacting safe working polices but the local health officials won't even listen to them. California is free to make their rules and they are free to enforce them in empty manufacturing plants. not surprisingly, California disagrees with Musk's claims. www.cnn.com/2020/05/09/tech/elon-musk-tesla-threatens-california/index.htmlFrom their reaction, it also sounds like they think he should leave. A Win-Win.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 17:17:14 GMT
I think a big part of the US' current economic woes come from a certain class of wealthy people who operate on the philosophy that the economy works like a game of monopoly where one wins by gaining control of all the money on the board. I contend that they are wrong, because in monopoly, when that happens, a winner is declared, and then ALL the assets are removed from play, and then redistributed at the beginning of the next game. perhaps this is all rolling back around to my earlier idea that a person caught hoarding wealth should be required to spend more. So in Monopoly, you redistribute the wealth and the game starts over. And guess who wins? The same guy. In real society the same thing would happen. The people that know how to use it would build up the economy back up and the ones that didn't would throw it all away. And who comes out ahead? Everybody. monopoly has enough of a random factor that while good players have better odds of winning than bad players, the only consistent result is that people refuse to play with obnoxious players. the point is that in real life the typical result of the game ending is the murder of the "winner" by the losers; so it is in the best interest of everybody to keep the game from ending. in real society, what is necessary is to prolong the game. it is an interesting factoid that the concept of the monopoly game was to demonstrate how an unbalanced economy could become destructive.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:21:43 GMT
So in Monopoly, you redistribute the wealth and the game starts over. And guess who wins? The same guy. In real society the same thing would happen. The people that know how to use it would build up the economy back up and the ones that didn't would throw it all away. And who comes out ahead? Everybody. monopoly has enough of a random factor that while good players have better odds of winning than bad players, the only consistent result is that people refuse to play with obnoxious players. the point is that in real life the typical result of the game ending is the murder of the "winner" by the losers; so it is in the best interest of everybody to keep the game from ending. in real society, what is necessary is to prolong the game. it is an interesting factoid that the concept of the monopoly game was to demonstrate how an unbalanced economy could become destructive. I'm in favor of letting the people that know what they are doing run the show. Otherwise you end up with politicians.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 17:23:09 GMT
From their reaction, it also sounds like they think he should leave. A Win-Win. I am reminded of the situation that occurred when the local tribe was building their casino (with backing from the Comstock tribe out of Nevada) there was negotiation of what would be fair for the tribe to contribute to the fire department in exchange for fire protection. all seemed to be going well until Comstock issued a press release accusing the Chief of trying to blackmail the local tribe. at which point the chief released his own statement that pointed out he was the chief of a volunteer department, that comstock had just issued an insult to all his volunteers, and that he had no authority to order volunteers to respond to any incident at the casino if they refused to show up. ultimately, the tribe decided that continued association with Comstock was bad for their relationship with the community, and sent them packing. similarly, if Musk is going to deal in bad faith with the state of California, by lying about the situation, then it would be better for all concerned if he move to a state where that sort of business dealings are acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 17:24:15 GMT
monopoly has enough of a random factor that while good players have better odds of winning than bad players, the only consistent result is that people refuse to play with obnoxious players. the point is that in real life the typical result of the game ending is the murder of the "winner" by the losers; so it is in the best interest of everybody to keep the game from ending. in real society, what is necessary is to prolong the game. it is an interesting factoid that the concept of the monopoly game was to demonstrate how an unbalanced economy could become destructive. I'm in favor of letting the people that know what they are doing run the show. Otherwise you end up with politicians. that works as long as you don't confuse knowing how to strip mine wealth from the system with knowing how to keep the system running.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:26:03 GMT
From their reaction, it also sounds like they think he should leave. A Win-Win. I am reminded of the situation that occurred when the local tribe was building their casino (with backing from the Comstock tribe out of Nevada) there was negotiation of what would be fair for the tribe to contribute to the fire department in exchange for fire protection. all seemed to be going well until Comstock issued a press release accusing the Chief of trying to blackmail the local tribe. at which point the chief released his own statement that pointed out he was the chief of a volunteer department, that comstock had just issued an insult to all his volunteers, and that he had no authority to order volunteers to respond to any incident at the casino if they refused to show up. ultimately, the tribe decided that continued association with Comstock was bad for their relationship with the community, and sent them packing. similarly, if Musk is going to deal in bad faith with the state of California, by lying about the situation, then it would be better for all concerned if he move to a state where that sort of business dealings are acceptable. I wonder if the unemployed in California agree.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 10, 2020 17:30:03 GMT
I'm in favor of letting the people that know what they are doing run the show. Otherwise you end up with politicians. that works as long as you don't confuse knowing how to strip mine wealth from the system with knowing how to keep the system running. Strip mining is their incentive for keeping the system running. And that same system is keeping a roof over my head and food on the table. So yeah, let them strip mine all they want.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 10, 2020 17:32:46 GMT
I am reminded of the situation that occurred when the local tribe was building their casino (with backing from the Comstock tribe out of Nevada) there was negotiation of what would be fair for the tribe to contribute to the fire department in exchange for fire protection. all seemed to be going well until Comstock issued a press release accusing the Chief of trying to blackmail the local tribe. at which point the chief released his own statement that pointed out he was the chief of a volunteer department, that comstock had just issued an insult to all his volunteers, and that he had no authority to order volunteers to respond to any incident at the casino if they refused to show up. ultimately, the tribe decided that continued association with Comstock was bad for their relationship with the community, and sent them packing. similarly, if Musk is going to deal in bad faith with the state of California, by lying about the situation, then it would be better for all concerned if he move to a state where that sort of business dealings are acceptable. I wonder if the unemployed in California agree. I wonder if tesla salesmen will be joining the ranks of the unemployed in California. I can see the people who can afford to buy teslas being in a position to express their disapproval of his petty tactics with their wallets. addendum: I question whether his employees are paid well enough to be his customers.
|
|